Does music have objectively measureable quality?

[blueschica]

It's all subjective. Unless it's Yoko. Or Lulu.

 

Awww, I like Lulu ! I see your point with Yoko, though! :)

[Rick N. Backer]

Regardless of where you put Queen or Freddie on your list, I think EP is one hell of a fan, and any band would be proud to have a fan that dedicated ..

 

And to get fans who are so dedicated, you've got to be one hell of a band ..

 

All bands have fans ... but some have fanatics ..

 

That's not something you can really measure, but it certainly is an observation

 

Thank you. :)

 

And yeah, Nirvana isn't usually my cup of tea, and while I think Cobain is a vastly overrated guitarist and an average singer, I do recognize the incredible talent he had as a performer, a songwriter, and simply as a rock artist. Nirvana is one of the great bands objectively, but they don't register on my list of favorites subjectively.

 

Cobain said himself he couldn't play well so for his fans to say otherwise is just stupid. Death seems to bring out the worst in fans.

 

I'm not an amazing guitarist myself, but if I put in the time and effort I think I could probably match Cobain's skill on the instrument within a year from where I am now. It would take me a heck of a lot longer to reach Brian May, EVH, Alex, or bunches of other masters levels.

 

Still sad that he went :( I read somewhere he was panning on collaborating with R.E.M. in the near future. That would've been pretty awesome.

 

You might be able to play Cobain's songs in a year (maybe not), but could you create them?

 

This goes back to something I've posted a few times here. Which one of these two guitarists appears to have more technical proficiency? Is he the one who plays the song "right?" Not to my ears.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHRNSeuvzlM

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZamjrXCDvo

 

Look, I'm not arguing against the idea that Cobain played with incredible feeling. He obviously did. His work, however technically average, truly connected with people and still does. Is it hard to play like Cobain though? No. Not compared to learning to play like EVH or Hendrix, Cobain is beginners' stuff. Now would I want to hear DT cover Lithium? No, probably not, because as technically skilled as they are, they have a reputation for missing the emotional point on covers and such, even in their own work. They'd play it note perfect and it wouldn't have nearly the same resonance as Nirvana's version. That doesn't make Cobain a technically better guitarist than Petrucci though. A Nirvana cover of Metropolis would probably sound even worse than DT doing Lithium. Or think of it this way, Kanye West is not a technically proficient singer. Now I wouldn't want to hear a more technically proficient singer take on his own written work, because it wouldn't probably sound quite right, but even less appealing is that time Kanye tried to sing Bohemian Rhapsody because he just did not have the physical technical ability to pull it off.

 

Sorry if that's confusing. Cobain was an excellent performer and songwriter, and any musician would feel blessed to create work of his caliber, but he was not a great guitarist. Putting him up against the Steve Howes and David Gilmores of the world proves that easily.

 

But, again, playing Smells Like Teen Spirit, and creating it are two different things. Is being a great musician just being able to play fast? Or does it also include being able to create things out of nothing that are memorable? Is the riff of Smoke on the Water hard to play? Is it good? What about Iron Man? Is it not as good as Tony's noodling on the debut album (which I personally love but think is self indulgent) because it's easy to play.

 

Dave Gilmour and Steve Howe are two good examples. Does Adrian Vandenberg blow them away? He's much faster than either of them even in their prime.

Edited February 19, 2018 by Rick N. Backer

[Stormtron]

It's all subjective. Unless it's Yoko. Or Lulu.

 

Awww, I like Lulu ! I see your point with Yoko, though! :)

 

I was referring to that Metallica/Lou Reed album. I forgot there was a singer named that too. I didn't mean her, she's cool. Unless you knew I meant that album...then what's wrong with you?!

[apetersvt]

The one test (for me) to determine if music is quality or not is to totally remove singing. If it can stand alone on the instrumentation, it is probably a decent song. If it requires some catchy lyrics to be noteworthy, it is probably shitty.

[blueschica]

It's all subjective. Unless it's Yoko. Or Lulu.

 

Awww, I like Lulu ! I see your point with Yoko, though! :)

 

I was referring to that Metallica/Lou Reed album. I forgot there was a singer named that too. I didn't mean her, she's cool. Unless you knew I meant that album...then what's wrong with you?!

 

No, I meant the singer! I didn't hear about the other, it sounds confusing!

[Entre_Perpetuo]

Regardless of where you put Queen or Freddie on your list, I think EP is one hell of a fan, and any band would be proud to have a fan that dedicated ..

 

And to get fans who are so dedicated, you've got to be one hell of a band ..

 

All bands have fans ... but some have fanatics ..

 

That's not something you can really measure, but it certainly is an observation

 

Thank you. :)

 

And yeah, Nirvana isn't usually my cup of tea, and while I think Cobain is a vastly overrated guitarist and an average singer, I do recognize the incredible talent he had as a performer, a songwriter, and simply as a rock artist. Nirvana is one of the great bands objectively, but they don't register on my list of favorites subjectively.

 

Cobain said himself he couldn't play well so for his fans to say otherwise is just stupid. Death seems to bring out the worst in fans.

 

I'm not an amazing guitarist myself, but if I put in the time and effort I think I could probably match Cobain's skill on the instrument within a year from where I am now. It would take me a heck of a lot longer to reach Brian May, EVH, Alex, or bunches of other masters levels.

 

Still sad that he went :( I read somewhere he was panning on collaborating with R.E.M. in the near future. That would've been pretty awesome.

 

You might be able to play Cobain's songs in a year (maybe not), but could you create them?

 

This goes back to something I've posted a few times here. Which one of these two guitarists appears to have more technical proficiency? Is he the one who plays the song "right?" Not to my ears.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHRNSeuvzlM

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZamjrXCDvo

 

Look, I'm not arguing against the idea that Cobain played with incredible feeling. He obviously did. His work, however technically average, truly connected with people and still does. Is it hard to play like Cobain though? No. Not compared to learning to play like EVH or Hendrix, Cobain is beginners' stuff. Now would I want to hear DT cover Lithium? No, probably not, because as technically skilled as they are, they have a reputation for missing the emotional point on covers and such, even in their own work. They'd play it note perfect and it wouldn't have nearly the same resonance as Nirvana's version. That doesn't make Cobain a technically better guitarist than Petrucci though. A Nirvana cover of Metropolis would probably sound even worse than DT doing Lithium. Or think of it this way, Kanye West is not a technically proficient singer. Now I wouldn't want to hear a more technically proficient singer take on his own written work, because it wouldn't probably sound quite right, but even less appealing is that time Kanye tried to sing Bohemian Rhapsody because he just did not have the physical technical ability to pull it off.

 

Sorry if that's confusing. Cobain was an excellent performer and songwriter, and any musician would feel blessed to create work of his caliber, but he was not a great guitarist. Putting him up against the Steve Howes and David Gilmores of the world proves that easily.

 

But, again, playing Smells Like Teen Spirit, and creating it are two different things. Is being a great musician just being able to play fast? Or does it also include being able to create things out of nothing that are memorable? Is the riff of Smoke on the Water hard to play? Is it good? What about Iron Man? Is it not as good as Tony's noodling on the debut album (which I personally love but think is self indulgent) because it's easy to play.

 

Dave Gilmour and Steve Howe are two good examples. Does Adrian Vandenberg blow them away? He's much faster than either of them even in their prime.

 

You cannot deny that Cobain's guitar work, however inspired, never reaches past an amateur level of difficulty. I understand what you're saying, but you can't say technical ability doesn't factor at all into the makings of a great guitarist. The ideal guitarist will be both technically proficient and incredibly creative and inspired, in addition to many other things. Obviously Cobain is more than qualified in one category, but he's so vastly under qualified in the other that I cannot call him a great guitarist. A great musician and songwriter, sure, yes, of course. History has proven it. But a great guitarist he is not.

[Rick N. Backer]

Regardless of where you put Queen or Freddie on your list, I think EP is one hell of a fan, and any band would be proud to have a fan that dedicated ..

 

And to get fans who are so dedicated, you've got to be one hell of a band ..

 

All bands have fans ... but some have fanatics ..

 

That's not something you can really measure, but it certainly is an observation

 

Thank you. :)

 

And yeah, Nirvana isn't usually my cup of tea, and while I think Cobain is a vastly overrated guitarist and an average singer, I do recognize the incredible talent he had as a performer, a songwriter, and simply as a rock artist. Nirvana is one of the great bands objectively, but they don't register on my list of favorites subjectively.

 

Cobain said himself he couldn't play well so for his fans to say otherwise is just stupid. Death seems to bring out the worst in fans.

 

I'm not an amazing guitarist myself, but if I put in the time and effort I think I could probably match Cobain's skill on the instrument within a year from where I am now. It would take me a heck of a lot longer to reach Brian May, EVH, Alex, or bunches of other masters levels.

 

Still sad that he went :( I read somewhere he was panning on collaborating with R.E.M. in the near future. That would've been pretty awesome.

 

You might be able to play Cobain's songs in a year (maybe not), but could you create them?

 

This goes back to something I've posted a few times here. Which one of these two guitarists appears to have more technical proficiency? Is he the one who plays the song "right?" Not to my ears.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHRNSeuvzlM

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZamjrXCDvo

 

Look, I'm not arguing against the idea that Cobain played with incredible feeling. He obviously did. His work, however technically average, truly connected with people and still does. Is it hard to play like Cobain though? No. Not compared to learning to play like EVH or Hendrix, Cobain is beginners' stuff. Now would I want to hear DT cover Lithium? No, probably not, because as technically skilled as they are, they have a reputation for missing the emotional point on covers and such, even in their own work. They'd play it note perfect and it wouldn't have nearly the same resonance as Nirvana's version. That doesn't make Cobain a technically better guitarist than Petrucci though. A Nirvana cover of Metropolis would probably sound even worse than DT doing Lithium. Or think of it this way, Kanye West is not a technically proficient singer. Now I wouldn't want to hear a more technically proficient singer take on his own written work, because it wouldn't probably sound quite right, but even less appealing is that time Kanye tried to sing Bohemian Rhapsody because he just did not have the physical technical ability to pull it off.

 

Sorry if that's confusing. Cobain was an excellent performer and songwriter, and any musician would feel blessed to create work of his caliber, but he was not a great guitarist. Putting him up against the Steve Howes and David Gilmores of the world proves that easily.

 

But, again, playing Smells Like Teen Spirit, and creating it are two different things. Is being a great musician just being able to play fast? Or does it also include being able to create things out of nothing that are memorable? Is the riff of Smoke on the Water hard to play? Is it good? What about Iron Man? Is it not as good as Tony's noodling on the debut album (which I personally love but think is self indulgent) because it's easy to play.

 

Dave Gilmour and Steve Howe are two good examples. Does Adrian Vandenberg blow them away? He's much faster than either of them even in their prime.

 

You cannot deny that Cobain's guitar work, however inspired, never reaches past an amateur level of difficulty. I understand what you're saying, but you can't say technical ability doesn't factor at all into the makings of a great guitarist. The ideal guitarist will be both technically proficient and incredibly creative and inspired, in addition to many other things. Obviously Cobain is more than qualified in one category, but he's so vastly under qualified in the other that I cannot call him a great guitarist. A great musician and songwriter, sure, yes, of course. History has proven it. But a great guitarist he is not.

 

Can't you make the same point about Gilmour? Would you agree that if you walk into your neighborhood Guitar Center, it's filled with kids who can play a Pink Floyd album note for note? But ask Gilmour himself to play Eruption and he probably wouldn't be able to very well?

 

But he's a great guitarist because his stuff didn't exist before he created it. That's a form of greatness, IMO.

[Entre_Perpetuo]

Regardless of where you put Queen or Freddie on your list, I think EP is one hell of a fan, and any band would be proud to have a fan that dedicated ..

 

And to get fans who are so dedicated, you've got to be one hell of a band ..

 

All bands have fans ... but some have fanatics ..

 

That's not something you can really measure, but it certainly is an observation

 

Thank you. :)

 

And yeah, Nirvana isn't usually my cup of tea, and while I think Cobain is a vastly overrated guitarist and an average singer, I do recognize the incredible talent he had as a performer, a songwriter, and simply as a rock artist. Nirvana is one of the great bands objectively, but they don't register on my list of favorites subjectively.

 

Cobain said himself he couldn't play well so for his fans to say otherwise is just stupid. Death seems to bring out the worst in fans.

 

I'm not an amazing guitarist myself, but if I put in the time and effort I think I could probably match Cobain's skill on the instrument within a year from where I am now. It would take me a heck of a lot longer to reach Brian May, EVH, Alex, or bunches of other masters levels.

 

Still sad that he went :( I read somewhere he was panning on collaborating with R.E.M. in the near future. That would've been pretty awesome.

 

You might be able to play Cobain's songs in a year (maybe not), but could you create them?

 

This goes back to something I've posted a few times here. Which one of these two guitarists appears to have more technical proficiency? Is he the one who plays the song "right?" Not to my ears.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHRNSeuvzlM

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZamjrXCDvo

 

Look, I'm not arguing against the idea that Cobain played with incredible feeling. He obviously did. His work, however technically average, truly connected with people and still does. Is it hard to play like Cobain though? No. Not compared to learning to play like EVH or Hendrix, Cobain is beginners' stuff. Now would I want to hear DT cover Lithium? No, probably not, because as technically skilled as they are, they have a reputation for missing the emotional point on covers and such, even in their own work. They'd play it note perfect and it wouldn't have nearly the same resonance as Nirvana's version. That doesn't make Cobain a technically better guitarist than Petrucci though. A Nirvana cover of Metropolis would probably sound even worse than DT doing Lithium. Or think of it this way, Kanye West is not a technically proficient singer. Now I wouldn't want to hear a more technically proficient singer take on his own written work, because it wouldn't probably sound quite right, but even less appealing is that time Kanye tried to sing Bohemian Rhapsody because he just did not have the physical technical ability to pull it off.

 

Sorry if that's confusing. Cobain was an excellent performer and songwriter, and any musician would feel blessed to create work of his caliber, but he was not a great guitarist. Putting him up against the Steve Howes and David Gilmores of the world proves that easily.

 

But, again, playing Smells Like Teen Spirit, and creating it are two different things. Is being a great musician just being able to play fast? Or does it also include being able to create things out of nothing that are memorable? Is the riff of Smoke on the Water hard to play? Is it good? What about Iron Man? Is it not as good as Tony's noodling on the debut album (which I personally love but think is self indulgent) because it's easy to play.

 

Dave Gilmour and Steve Howe are two good examples. Does Adrian Vandenberg blow them away? He's much faster than either of them even in their prime.

 

You cannot deny that Cobain's guitar work, however inspired, never reaches past an amateur level of difficulty. I understand what you're saying, but you can't say technical ability doesn't factor at all into the makings of a great guitarist. The ideal guitarist will be both technically proficient and incredibly creative and inspired, in addition to many other things. Obviously Cobain is more than qualified in one category, but he's so vastly under qualified in the other that I cannot call him a great guitarist. A great musician and songwriter, sure, yes, of course. History has proven it. But a great guitarist he is not.

 

Can't you make the same point about Gilmour? Would you agree that if you walk into your neighborhood Guitar Center, it's filled with kids who can play a Pink Floyd album note for note? But ask Gilmour himself to play Eruption and he probably wouldn't be able to very well?

 

But he's a great guitarist because his stuff didn't exist before he created it. That's a form of greatness, IMO.

 

I'd write a counterpoint but I think we've talked in circles enough. I'm not sure we're actually that far off of each other's views, I just refuse to see Cobain as one of the guitar greats. Agree to disagree?

[Lucas]

Regardless of where you put Queen or Freddie on your list, I think EP is one hell of a fan, and any band would be proud to have a fan that dedicated ..

 

And to get fans who are so dedicated, you've got to be one hell of a band ..

 

All bands have fans ... but some have fanatics ..

 

That's not something you can really measure, but it certainly is an observation

 

Thank you. :)

 

And yeah, Nirvana isn't usually my cup of tea, and while I think Cobain is a vastly overrated guitarist and an average singer, I do recognize the incredible talent he had as a performer, a songwriter, and simply as a rock artist. Nirvana is one of the great bands objectively, but they don't register on my list of favorites subjectively.

 

Cobain said himself he couldn't play well so for his fans to say otherwise is just stupid. Death seems to bring out the worst in fans.

 

I'm not an amazing guitarist myself, but if I put in the time and effort I think I could probably match Cobain's skill on the instrument within a year from where I am now. It would take me a heck of a lot longer to reach Brian May, EVH, Alex, or bunches of other masters levels.

 

Still sad that he went :( I read somewhere he was panning on collaborating with R.E.M. in the near future. That would've been pretty awesome.

 

You might be able to play Cobain's songs in a year (maybe not), but could you create them?

 

This goes back to something I've posted a few times here. Which one of these two guitarists appears to have more technical proficiency? Is he the one who plays the song "right?" Not to my ears.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHRNSeuvzlM

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZamjrXCDvo

 

Look, I'm not arguing against the idea that Cobain played with incredible feeling. He obviously did. His work, however technically average, truly connected with people and still does. Is it hard to play like Cobain though? No. Not compared to learning to play like EVH or Hendrix, Cobain is beginners' stuff. Now would I want to hear DT cover Lithium? No, probably not, because as technically skilled as they are, they have a reputation for missing the emotional point on covers and such, even in their own work. They'd play it note perfect and it wouldn't have nearly the same resonance as Nirvana's version. That doesn't make Cobain a technically better guitarist than Petrucci though. A Nirvana cover of Metropolis would probably sound even worse than DT doing Lithium. Or think of it this way, Kanye West is not a technically proficient singer. Now I wouldn't want to hear a more technically proficient singer take on his own written work, because it wouldn't probably sound quite right, but even less appealing is that time Kanye tried to sing Bohemian Rhapsody because he just did not have the physical technical ability to pull it off.

 

Sorry if that's confusing. Cobain was an excellent performer and songwriter, and any musician would feel blessed to create work of his caliber, but he was not a great guitarist. Putting him up against the Steve Howes and David Gilmores of the world proves that easily.

 

But, again, playing Smells Like Teen Spirit, and creating it are two different things. Is being a great musician just being able to play fast? Or does it also include being able to create things out of nothing that are memorable? Is the riff of Smoke on the Water hard to play? Is it good? What about Iron Man? Is it not as good as Tony's noodling on the debut album (which I personally love but think is self indulgent) because it's easy to play.

 

Dave Gilmour and Steve Howe are two good examples. Does Adrian Vandenberg blow them away? He's much faster than either of them even in their prime.

 

You cannot deny that Cobain's guitar work, however inspired, never reaches past an amateur level of difficulty. I understand what you're saying, but you can't say technical ability doesn't factor at all into the makings of a great guitarist. The ideal guitarist will be both technically proficient and incredibly creative and inspired, in addition to many other things. Obviously Cobain is more than qualified in one category, but he's so vastly under qualified in the other that I cannot call him a great guitarist. A great musician and songwriter, sure, yes, of course. History has proven it. But a great guitarist he is not.

 

Can't you make the same point about Gilmour? Would you agree that if you walk into your neighborhood Guitar Center, it's filled with kids who can play a Pink Floyd album note for note? But ask Gilmour himself to play Eruption and he probably wouldn't be able to very well?

 

But he's a great guitarist because his stuff didn't exist before he created it. That's a form of greatness, IMO.

 

I'd write a counterpoint but I think we've talked in circles enough. I'm not sure we're actually that far off of each other's views, I just refuse to see Cobain as one of the guitar greats. Agree to disagree?

 

I like dead horses .. after all, I am a Denver Bronco fan

 

I think David Gilmour has a recognizable guitar style .. Players that have been influenced by Gilmour, you hear them and think "that's Gilmourseque "

 

Does Kurt Cobain have unique, or at least distinctly recognizable guitar style ???

 

Just because that chorus / tremolo effect has become somewhat synonymous with Nirvana's music doesn't make Cobain a guitar great ... That effect has been used by countless other, less popular players and the fact that someone might think "that sounds like Kurt Cobain" really doesn't have much to do with his playing ability ..

 

I'm not saying that he didn't write and create meaningful music ... But I don't see where he meets any criteria of a "guitar great"

 

 

[ReRushed]

Who is arguing that Kurt Cobain is a guitar great? He is a very effective guitarist. He understands the importance of a hook and plays with emotion and abandon. His playing is based in punk rock. Personally, I think he uses the guitar more effectively than most so-called guitar greats.

[Rick N. Backer]

Regardless of where you put Queen or Freddie on your list, I think EP is one hell of a fan, and any band would be proud to have a fan that dedicated ..

 

And to get fans who are so dedicated, you've got to be one hell of a band ..

 

All bands have fans ... but some have fanatics ..

 

That's not something you can really measure, but it certainly is an observation

 

Thank you. :)

 

And yeah, Nirvana isn't usually my cup of tea, and while I think Cobain is a vastly overrated guitarist and an average singer, I do recognize the incredible talent he had as a performer, a songwriter, and simply as a rock artist. Nirvana is one of the great bands objectively, but they don't register on my list of favorites subjectively.

 

Cobain said himself he couldn't play well so for his fans to say otherwise is just stupid. Death seems to bring out the worst in fans.

 

I'm not an amazing guitarist myself, but if I put in the time and effort I think I could probably match Cobain's skill on the instrument within a year from where I am now. It would take me a heck of a lot longer to reach Brian May, EVH, Alex, or bunches of other masters levels.

 

Still sad that he went :( I read somewhere he was panning on collaborating with R.E.M. in the near future. That would've been pretty awesome.

 

You might be able to play Cobain's songs in a year (maybe not), but could you create them?

 

This goes back to something I've posted a few times here. Which one of these two guitarists appears to have more technical proficiency? Is he the one who plays the song "right?" Not to my ears.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHRNSeuvzlM

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZamjrXCDvo

 

Look, I'm not arguing against the idea that Cobain played with incredible feeling. He obviously did. His work, however technically average, truly connected with people and still does. Is it hard to play like Cobain though? No. Not compared to learning to play like EVH or Hendrix, Cobain is beginners' stuff. Now would I want to hear DT cover Lithium? No, probably not, because as technically skilled as they are, they have a reputation for missing the emotional point on covers and such, even in their own work. They'd play it note perfect and it wouldn't have nearly the same resonance as Nirvana's version. That doesn't make Cobain a technically better guitarist than Petrucci though. A Nirvana cover of Metropolis would probably sound even worse than DT doing Lithium. Or think of it this way, Kanye West is not a technically proficient singer. Now I wouldn't want to hear a more technically proficient singer take on his own written work, because it wouldn't probably sound quite right, but even less appealing is that time Kanye tried to sing Bohemian Rhapsody because he just did not have the physical technical ability to pull it off.

 

Sorry if that's confusing. Cobain was an excellent performer and songwriter, and any musician would feel blessed to create work of his caliber, but he was not a great guitarist. Putting him up against the Steve Howes and David Gilmores of the world proves that easily.

 

But, again, playing Smells Like Teen Spirit, and creating it are two different things. Is being a great musician just being able to play fast? Or does it also include being able to create things out of nothing that are memorable? Is the riff of Smoke on the Water hard to play? Is it good? What about Iron Man? Is it not as good as Tony's noodling on the debut album (which I personally love but think is self indulgent) because it's easy to play.

 

Dave Gilmour and Steve Howe are two good examples. Does Adrian Vandenberg blow them away? He's much faster than either of them even in their prime.

 

You cannot deny that Cobain's guitar work, however inspired, never reaches past an amateur level of difficulty. I understand what you're saying, but you can't say technical ability doesn't factor at all into the makings of a great guitarist. The ideal guitarist will be both technically proficient and incredibly creative and inspired, in addition to many other things. Obviously Cobain is more than qualified in one category, but he's so vastly under qualified in the other that I cannot call him a great guitarist. A great musician and songwriter, sure, yes, of course. History has proven it. But a great guitarist he is not.

 

Can't you make the same point about Gilmour? Would you agree that if you walk into your neighborhood Guitar Center, it's filled with kids who can play a Pink Floyd album note for note? But ask Gilmour himself to play Eruption and he probably wouldn't be able to very well?

 

But he's a great guitarist because his stuff didn't exist before he created it. That's a form of greatness, IMO.

 

I'd write a counterpoint but I think we've talked in circles enough. I'm not sure we're actually that far off of each other's views, I just refuse to see Cobain as one of the guitar greats. Agree to disagree?

 

I like dead horses .. after all, I am a Denver Bronco fan

 

I think David Gilmour has a recognizable guitar style .. Players that have been influenced by Gilmour, you hear them and think "that's Gilmourseque "

 

Does Kurt Cobain have unique, or at least distinctly recognizable guitar style ???

 

Just because that chorus / tremolo effect has become somewhat synonymous with Nirvana's music doesn't make Cobain a guitar great ... That effect has been used by countless other, less popular players and the fact that someone might think "that sounds like Kurt Cobain" really doesn't have much to do with his playing ability ..

 

I'm not saying that he didn't write and create meaningful music ... But I don't see where he meets any criteria of a "guitar great"

 

Can you name someone who is obviously influenced by Gilmour? Not someone who says they are, someone who I would listen to and say, "that sounds like Pink Floyd?" It's an honest question because I can't think of anyone.

 

But your point about the chorus/tremolo effect is somewhat inconsistent with your point about Gilmour, no? Cobain had a style that people copied, but that doesn't make him great, but people sounding like Gilmour (to you, again, I can't think of anyone who fits that description) is some evidence Gilmour is great.

 

Many people say Keith Richards is a great guitarist. Same for Pete Townshend. And Angus Young. None of them are what I would call a virtuoso, but I'd listen to them for a month before I'd listen to Malmsteen for a minute.

 

Fans of certain bands, Queen being the one that sticks out to me, may want to believe there is an objective "quality" to the band's work ("You may not love Freddie like I do, but you have to admit his voice is great") but there isn't. If you enjoy it, it's good.

[Texas King]

Who is arguing that Kurt Cobain is a guitar great? He is a very effective guitarist. He understands the importance of a hook and plays with emotion and abandon. His playing is based in punk rock. Personally, I think he uses the guitar more effectively than most so-called guitar greats.

 

I always found Kurt Cobain incredibly overrated as a musician.

I have to say as a guitarist Jerry Cantrell (yeah, from the same, grunge era) blows (mediocre) Cobain away anytime. And how much credit Nirvana or to say better, Kurt Cobain alone, get(s) for music/musicianship and compare it with how much credit guys Jerry Cantrell and Layne Staley (who is a much greater ARTIST than Cobain to me) get. That's unfair. I can't deny Cobain's influence and impact to the 90's rock scene, but from a music aspect I don't find anything that special, above-average or earthshaking about him and his band.

 

And comparing Cobain and Gilmour as musicians is beyond me. They're not in the same ballpark.

[Rick N. Backer]

Who is arguing that Kurt Cobain is a guitar great? He is a very effective guitarist. He understands the importance of a hook and plays with emotion and abandon. His playing is based in punk rock. Personally, I think he uses the guitar more effectively than most so-called guitar greats.

 

I always found Kurt Cobain incredibly overrated as a musician.

 

 

And comparing Cobain and Gilmour as musicians is beyond me. They're not in the same ballpark.

 

The former is the reason for the latter.

[Texas King]

Who is arguing that Kurt Cobain is a guitar great? He is a very effective guitarist. He understands the importance of a hook and plays with emotion and abandon. His playing is based in punk rock. Personally, I think he uses the guitar more effectively than most so-called guitar greats.

 

I always found Kurt Cobain incredibly overrated as a musician.

 

 

And comparing Cobain and Gilmour as musicians is beyond me. They're not in the same ballpark.

 

The former is the reason for the latter.

 

I don't understand what you mean.

[Rick N. Backer]

Who is arguing that Kurt Cobain is a guitar great? He is a very effective guitarist. He understands the importance of a hook and plays with emotion and abandon. His playing is based in punk rock. Personally, I think he uses the guitar more effectively than most so-called guitar greats.

 

I always found Kurt Cobain incredibly overrated as a musician.

 

 

And comparing Cobain and Gilmour as musicians is beyond me. They're not in the same ballpark.

 

The former is the reason for the latter.

 

I don't understand what you mean.

 

You don't like Cobain. That's why you think he's not in Gilmour's ballpark, who I would guess you do like. To me, I like Gilmour's music, but there's nothing all that special about his guitar playing.

[ReRushed]

Who is arguing that Kurt Cobain is a guitar great? He is a very effective guitarist. He understands the importance of a hook and plays with emotion and abandon. His playing is based in punk rock. Personally, I think he uses the guitar more effectively than most so-called guitar greats.

 

I always found Kurt Cobain incredibly overrated as a musician.

I have to say as a guitarist Jerry Cantrell (yeah, from the same, grunge era) blows (mediocre) Cobain away anytime. And how much credit Nirvana or to say better, Kurt Cobain alone, get(s) for music/musicianship and compare it with how much credit guys Jerry Cantrell and Layne Staley (who is a much greater ARTIST than Cobain to me) get. That's unfair. I can't deny Cobain's influence and impact to the 90's rock scene, but from a music aspect I don't find anything that special, above-average or earthshaking about him and his band.

 

And comparing Cobain and Gilmour as musicians is beyond me. They're not in the same ballpark.

As far as I know, Cobain is considered a singer/songwriter before anything else. His guitar playing is secondary, but effective. Same with an artist like John Lennon or Lou Reed or Bob Dylan. The songs, that's what matters. That's the point and goal for musicians like Cobain. Cobain was the guy way back in the early 1990s. Personally, hearing a lot of those songs was a gut punch to me. They shook me from my complacency. Top shelf stuff to my ears. And millions of other fans. That consensus is an objective fact. But that doesn't mean you have to like it. For instance, most Alice in Chains bores me, but I know they have tons of admirers. Good for them.

[On TheRoad To Adventure]

I don't believe it's possible to objectively measure music quality. I happen to think that Geddy Lee is the best rock singer, and I think the quality of RUSH is impeccable. But as we all know, some people hate RUSH. The same goes for any other band - there are lovers and haters. I can go to a classical music concert and listen to an amazing violinist, but it's had to draw a line between a superb violinist and someone who is simply accomplished. It's all a matter of taste, I think, whatever genre you're referring to.

[Lucas]

Regardless of where you put Queen or Freddie on your list, I think EP is one hell of a fan, and any band would be proud to have a fan that dedicated ..

 

And to get fans who are so dedicated, you've got to be one hell of a band ..

 

All bands have fans ... but some have fanatics ..

 

That's not something you can really measure, but it certainly is an observation

 

Thank you. :)

 

And yeah, Nirvana isn't usually my cup of tea, and while I think Cobain is a vastly overrated guitarist and an average singer, I do recognize the incredible talent he had as a performer, a songwriter, and simply as a rock artist. Nirvana is one of the great bands objectively, but they don't register on my list of favorites subjectively.

 

Cobain said himself he couldn't play well so for his fans to say otherwise is just stupid. Death seems to bring out the worst in fans.

 

I'm not an amazing guitarist myself, but if I put in the time and effort I think I could probably match Cobain's skill on the instrument within a year from where I am now. It would take me a heck of a lot longer to reach Brian May, EVH, Alex, or bunches of other masters levels.

 

Still sad that he went :( I read somewhere he was panning on collaborating with R.E.M. in the near future. That would've been pretty awesome.

 

You might be able to play Cobain's songs in a year (maybe not), but could you create them?

 

This goes back to something I've posted a few times here. Which one of these two guitarists appears to have more technical proficiency? Is he the one who plays the song "right?" Not to my ears.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHRNSeuvzlM

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZamjrXCDvo

 

Look, I'm not arguing against the idea that Cobain played with incredible feeling. He obviously did. His work, however technically average, truly connected with people and still does. Is it hard to play like Cobain though? No. Not compared to learning to play like EVH or Hendrix, Cobain is beginners' stuff. Now would I want to hear DT cover Lithium? No, probably not, because as technically skilled as they are, they have a reputation for missing the emotional point on covers and such, even in their own work. They'd play it note perfect and it wouldn't have nearly the same resonance as Nirvana's version. That doesn't make Cobain a technically better guitarist than Petrucci though. A Nirvana cover of Metropolis would probably sound even worse than DT doing Lithium. Or think of it this way, Kanye West is not a technically proficient singer. Now I wouldn't want to hear a more technically proficient singer take on his own written work, because it wouldn't probably sound quite right, but even less appealing is that time Kanye tried to sing Bohemian Rhapsody because he just did not have the physical technical ability to pull it off.

 

Sorry if that's confusing. Cobain was an excellent performer and songwriter, and any musician would feel blessed to create work of his caliber, but he was not a great guitarist. Putting him up against the Steve Howes and David Gilmores of the world proves that easily.

 

But, again, playing Smells Like Teen Spirit, and creating it are two different things. Is being a great musician just being able to play fast? Or does it also include being able to create things out of nothing that are memorable? Is the riff of Smoke on the Water hard to play? Is it good? What about Iron Man? Is it not as good as Tony's noodling on the debut album (which I personally love but think is self indulgent) because it's easy to play.

 

Dave Gilmour and Steve Howe are two good examples. Does Adrian Vandenberg blow them away? He's much faster than either of them even in their prime.

 

You cannot deny that Cobain's guitar work, however inspired, never reaches past an amateur level of difficulty. I understand what you're saying, but you can't say technical ability doesn't factor at all into the makings of a great guitarist. The ideal guitarist will be both technically proficient and incredibly creative and inspired, in addition to many other things. Obviously Cobain is more than qualified in one category, but he's so vastly under qualified in the other that I cannot call him a great guitarist. A great musician and songwriter, sure, yes, of course. History has proven it. But a great guitarist he is not.

 

Can't you make the same point about Gilmour? Would you agree that if you walk into your neighborhood Guitar Center, it's filled with kids who can play a Pink Floyd album note for note? But ask Gilmour himself to play Eruption and he probably wouldn't be able to very well?

 

But he's a great guitarist because his stuff didn't exist before he created it. That's a form of greatness, IMO.

 

I'd write a counterpoint but I think we've talked in circles enough. I'm not sure we're actually that far off of each other's views, I just refuse to see Cobain as one of the guitar greats. Agree to disagree?

 

I like dead horses .. after all, I am a Denver Bronco fan

 

I think David Gilmour has a recognizable guitar style .. Players that have been influenced by Gilmour, you hear them and think "that's Gilmourseque "

 

Does Kurt Cobain have unique, or at least distinctly recognizable guitar style ???

 

Just because that chorus / tremolo effect has become somewhat synonymous with Nirvana's music doesn't make Cobain a guitar great ... That effect has been used by countless other, less popular players and the fact that someone might think "that sounds like Kurt Cobain" really doesn't have much to do with his playing ability ..

 

I'm not saying that he didn't write and create meaningful music ... But I don't see where he meets any criteria of a "guitar great"

 

Can you name someone who is obviously influenced by Gilmour? Not someone who says they are, someone who I would listen to and say, "that sounds like Pink Floyd?" It's an honest question because I can't think of anyone.

 

But your point about the chorus/tremolo effect is somewhat inconsistent with your point about Gilmour, no? Cobain had a style that people copied, but that doesn't make him great, but people sounding like Gilmour (to you, again, I can't think of anyone who fits that description) is some evidence Gilmour is great.

 

Many people say Keith Richards is a great guitarist. Same for Pete Townshend. And Angus Young. None of them are what I would call a virtuoso, but I'd listen to them for a month before I'd listen to Malmsteen for a minute.

 

Fans of certain bands, Queen being the one that sticks out to me, may want to believe there is an objective "quality" to the band's work ("You may not love Freddie like I do, but you have to admit his voice is great") but there isn't. If you enjoy it, it's good.

 

"Sounding like Pink Floyd" and "sounding like David Gilmour" are two different things .. As are "sounding like Nirvana" and "sounding like Kurt Cobain" ..

 

There have been countless, watered down bands who feature singers who have aped Kurt Cobain singing style - so as far as vocals, I can definitely see the "sounds like Kurt Cobain" line of thinking ... But as a guitarist, no ..

 

My point about getting a guitar to sound like Kurt with the chorus and tremolo is that people might only point to that as sounding like Cobain because they haven't heard or been exposed to the countless others who have used those same effects ... Nirvana's music was very popular and reached a lot of people - people who may not have ever heard the "Eighties" from Killing Joke or The Damned's Life Goes On" or the thousands of surf songs that used the same effect ...

 

Giving credit to Kurt Cobain for a certain guitar sound is like giving credit to Green Day for inventing punk

 

 

 

 

As far as Gilmour's obvious influence, Jonny Buckland immediately comes to mind ... I am not a big Coldplay fan, but I think the influence is obvious ... Syu from Galneryus also has those gut wrenching, lyrical solos that make me think of Gilmour, and going back to one of Gilmour's contemporaries, Michael Schenker - his style evolved into something very similar to Gilmour's ..

 

 

.

 

 

.

 

.

Edited February 20, 2018 by Lucas

[Lucas]

Who is arguing that Kurt Cobain is a guitar great? He is a very effective guitarist. He understands the importance of a hook and plays with emotion and abandon. His playing is based in punk rock. Personally, I think he uses the guitar more effectively than most so-called guitar greats.

 

I always found Kurt Cobain incredibly overrated as a musician.

I have to say as a guitarist Jerry Cantrell (yeah, from the same, grunge era) blows (mediocre) Cobain away anytime. And how much credit Nirvana or to say better, Kurt Cobain alone, get(s) for music/musicianship and compare it with how much credit guys Jerry Cantrell and Layne Staley (who is a much greater ARTIST than Cobain to me) get. That's unfair. I can't deny Cobain's influence and impact to the 90's rock scene, but from a music aspect I don't find anything that special, above-average or earthshaking about him and his band.

 

And comparing Cobain and Gilmour as musicians is beyond me. They're not in the same ballpark.

As far as I know, Cobain is considered a singer/songwriter before anything else. His guitar playing is secondary, but effective. Same with an artist like John Lennon or Lou Reed or Bob Dylan. The songs, that's what matters. That's the point and goal for musicians like Cobain. Cobain was the guy way back in the early 1990s. Personally, hearing a lot of those songs was a gut punch to me. They shook me from my complacency. Top shelf stuff to my ears. And millions of other fans. That consensus is an objective fact. But that doesn't mean you have to like it. For instance, most Alice in Chains bores me, but I know they have tons of admirers. Good for them.

 

You don't see Nirvana the least bit derivative in the same way Green Day was ??

[ReRushed]

Who is arguing that Kurt Cobain is a guitar great? He is a very effective guitarist. He understands the importance of a hook and plays with emotion and abandon. His playing is based in punk rock. Personally, I think he uses the guitar more effectively than most so-called guitar greats.

 

I always found Kurt Cobain incredibly overrated as a musician.

I have to say as a guitarist Jerry Cantrell (yeah, from the same, grunge era) blows (mediocre) Cobain away anytime. And how much credit Nirvana or to say better, Kurt Cobain alone, get(s) for music/musicianship and compare it with how much credit guys Jerry Cantrell and Layne Staley (who is a much greater ARTIST than Cobain to me) get. That's unfair. I can't deny Cobain's influence and impact to the 90's rock scene, but from a music aspect I don't find anything that special, above-average or earthshaking about him and his band.

 

And comparing Cobain and Gilmour as musicians is beyond me. They're not in the same ballpark.

As far as I know, Cobain is considered a singer/songwriter before anything else. His guitar playing is secondary, but effective. Same with an artist like John Lennon or Lou Reed or Bob Dylan. The songs, that's what matters. That's the point and goal for musicians like Cobain. Cobain was the guy way back in the early 1990s. Personally, hearing a lot of those songs was a gut punch to me. They shook me from my complacency. Top shelf stuff to my ears. And millions of other fans. That consensus is an objective fact. But that doesn't mean you have to like it. For instance, most Alice in Chains bores me, but I know they have tons of admirers. Good for them.

 

You don't see Nirvana the least bit derivative in the same way Green Day was ??

No, not in the same way. Not at all.

[custom55]

If the music, no matter the genre, gives me an out of body experience, I'm all in.

[toymaker]

Objectivity in human perception doesn't exist. Even the preceding sentence isn't objective because I wrote it. The sky is not really the colour you think it is. I am a butterfly dreaming I am a man dreaming he is a butterfly.

 

RUSH RULES!

[Rick N. Backer]

As far as Gilmour's obvious influence, Jonny Buckland immediately comes to mind ... I am not a big Coldplay fan, but I think the influence is obvious ... Syu from Galneryus also has those gut wrenching, lyrical solos that make me think of Gilmour, and going back to one of Gilmour's contemporaries, Michael Schenker - his style evolved into something very similar to Gilmour's ..

 

I'm not a Coldplay fan either, but I've heard them, and I don't hear the influence. I've never heard of Syu, so I can't comment on him. Schenker is someone who I would say is magnitudes better on the guitar than Gilmour, and also someone who I would never think of as having been influenced by him.

 

You're a Gilmour fan, and that's great. He's not objectively better than Cobain, or anyone else, though. That's really my point.

[toymaker]

Saving face. Protecting what you think is right is a basic survival instinct. On some primal level, the Queen fan wants to tear out the throat of the Cobain fan, and vice versa. They circle each other, growling and hissing and giving each other their best stink eyes. Good thing we're all civilized. Saving grace.

[Entre_Perpetuo]

Saving face. Protecting what you think is right is a basic survival instinct. On some primal level, the Queen fan wants to tear out the throat of the Cobain fan, and vice versa. They circle each other, growling and hissing and giving each other their best stink eyes. Good thing we're all civilized. Saving grace.

 

Dang, I dropped out of this argument like at least a page ago and yet I can't catch a break, lol.

 

For what it's worth, to Rick's recent comment. I think Gilmore is objectively better than me, and I don't think Cobain is a whole lot better than me, thus I think Gilmore is objectively better than Cobain. I know that probably doesn't change anyone's opinion and I just put myself back into the argument, but that's just another 2 cents from me.

 

EDIT: also I can hear what Lucas was talking about hearing a Gilmore influence in Johnny Buckland. When he does actually play lead electric guitar in Coldplay's music, he has a very lyrical style and emotive quality to his work that isn't dissimilar to Gilmore, just that Gilmore can play circles around Buckland otherwise, and Buckland is far more repetitive.

Edited February 20, 2018 by Entre_Perpetuo